As
much as we would like to take our tripods everywhere,
it is
not always possible. Stands at stadiums, game fields or
courts, rinks, race tracks and theaters, are off limits
for tripods
-or should be, to avoid accidents of people tripping, fights
about it, legal disputes, liability claims and/or making
a lifetime enemy. It
is just not worth it.

For
image sharpness, the best next thing after vises is sandbags,
then tripods, then monopods, and at the very low end of the
scale, handholding. Sandbags, now substituted by beanbags,
need a good flat area to rest, like the hood of a car. So
unless in a safari that is seldom convenient for most purposes.
Since we've done tripods,
let's do monopods.

Monopods
with Markins Q3 ball head and with swivel head
and Quick
Release shoe

What monopod?

Like
tripods, monopods come in several flavors. In general you
want the sturdiest possible monopod with the smallest number
of sections and the shortest length when collapsed. Trade-offs
have to be made, but if a monopod flexes when you lean on
it, it wont help much for sharp images; and if it bends when
you fall on top of it on a trail, your first impulse will
be to throw it down the closest cliff.

a)
Materials.
Although I have one that feels like plumbing steel pipe,
aluminum
and CF (carbon fiber) are the typical materials in the market;
however, after I tried the heftiest of the
Gitzo carbon
fiber monopods
I
really
don't want to use anything else.

As
in
CF
tripods, there are also good savings in weight when
it comes to good CF monopods. For those in the high load
capacity class, they are really very light weight for the
loads
they
can take.

Yes,
aluminum gives you lower prices (so far); however, carbon
fiber
gives
you
the
safety of better vibration dampening. In aluminum,
what
you
save in price you usually spend in frustration for
insufficient
sturdiness if you don't choose one with a high load capacity;
what you gain in vibration dampening with the carbon
fibers
you pay in cost, but the usual premium benefit is added
strength and sturdiness. And a monopod you can lean on.

If
you are an infrequent monopod user and don't to spend much,
get a robust Manfrotto aluminum one, like the 681B or the
more
compact
680B. No way
to go wrong on that. They are one of the preferred
choices of working sports photographers.

b)
Number of leg sections. The ideal would be the
least possible number, however a compromise has to be
made
to allow
for a reasonable
collapsed size without loosing rigidity. If too long it becomes
cumbersome to carry it around and it will stay home.

The
most frequently found monopods amongst advanced amateur
and
professional Nikonians can be compared in the table below:

*
As of June 2012 at major online retailers
in the
USA and the PhotoProShop

Gitzo
GM5541

Gitzo
GM3551

Manfrotto
681B

Manfrotto
680B

You
may ask: why the prices are so different between carbon
fiber (CF)
and aluminum?
And more important: is a CF monopod worth it? The short
answer
is:
yes, otherwise they wouldn't be selling as much as they
do. Is there a status reason behind
such
purchases?
Yes
and
no.
Yes
in the sense that owners take pride in owning one, but
when asked about the main motivator, quality and durability
were
the factors most often mentioned. Owners of CF monopods,
also own CF tripods, so they are obviously familiar
with
the materials characteristics. Plus, if you are very
tall, there
are no other choices for this quality level.

Let's
compare the above monopods load capacities to those of
tripods:

25Kg
/ 55lbs is the load capacity of the new
GM5541 monopod
and also of the Series 5 tripods, recommended
for the maximum load of
a pro body with
lenses such
as the
400mm f/2.8 AF-S or the 600mm f/4 AF-S Nikkor and tele converter.
And the monopod does it on a single leg. The
Gitzo GM5541 CF monopod
is now used daily by pro sports photographers with the
heaviest
setups. This is the one I use now.

18Kg
/ 39.6lbs is the load capacity of the new
GM3551
carbon fiber monopod and for the now very popular Series
3 CF tripods; recommended for up to a pro body and lenses
such
as the 200-40mm f/4G ED
IF AF-S VR and the 500mm f/4 with tele converter. Again,
same load capacity than the corresponding tripods, on a
single leg.

Are
there lighter and smaller monopods? Sure. But, why get
anything below those load capacities when they give the
best sense of sturdiness and reliability, are so
light and collapse to a comfortable size? Unless of course
you have committed yourself to using very light bodies
(including your own )
with small lenses.

Are
there cheaper alternatives? Yes. However, one usually gets what one
pays for.

What to look for

•

Maximum
height. Like with tripods, the
ideal height is at least that which will allow
you to bring your camera’s
viewfinder to eye level. A few extra inches always help.

•

Collapsed
size. This
is getting more and more important if you travel with
your monopod and you plan on packing it in your suitcase
or carrying it in a backpack.

•

Load
capacity.
With anything above a P&S camera, make sure the monopod’s
load capacity is at least two and a half times the weight
of your heaviest gear. To be safe, the same applies to
any head to be used. The ideal is three times.

•

Interchangeable
leg tip. To be able to switch between
rubber leg tips (when over tile or carpet) and spikes
(when in the field) is a real plus; you are then ready
to take on any type of surface or terrain. Or you can
just have heavy duty rubber caps for your spikes.